Well, money talks, and weak people like money. The saudis are scum, I would never have anything to do with them.
I mean the just now apparently "let" women drive! Are you kidding me, they still think of women as property and as lesser beings than dogs. Or try being gay over there.
The comments when all comments seem to be concentrated in a couple of threads rehashing the same issues.
All stories concerning the housing problem in SF. Nobody cares, move on, it's just a city. Yes I know there must be a disproportional amount of SF residents in this forum, but nobody still cares about your housing problems :)
The green parties around the world are to blame for this.
The only worthwhile actions to combat this are
1) Using nuclear power (on a massive scale preferrably)
2) Stopping globalisation (because transport is such a large contributor to CO2 emissions.). Local manufacturing would be much better for the environment (reduced transportation needs and also the western countries factories are much more sustainable than in third world countries and china)
Also reducing immigration helps, people in Africa use much less resources than the same people eg. transported to the cold north.
To all the "where does the spent fuel go" (dump it in the ocean) and "too expensive" (regulatory problem). These things are not a problem. Only the irrational fear of "nucular" is the problem.
"For nuclear waste, a simple, quick, and easy disposal method would be to convert the waste into a glass — a technology that is well in hand — and simply drop it into the ocean at random locations.5 No one can claim that we don't know how to do that! With this disposal, the waste produced by one power plant in one year would eventually cause an average total of 0.6 fatalities, spread out over many millions of years, by contaminating seafood. Incidentally, this disposal technique would do no harm to ocean ecology. In fact, if all the world's electricity were produced by nuclear power and all the waste generated for the next hundred years were dumped in the ocean, the radiation dose to sea animals would never be increased by as much as 1% above its present level from natural radioactivity."
Haha, where I live we have no natural light even outside half of the year (near the arctic circle).
And we are most productive during the dark season because there isn't anything else to do, or any distractions nagging on your mind (like going to the beach etc) :)
No, it's over 300km (source: have actually drived that much on a charge).
It's an excellent car, can't imagine what a tesla has to offer over it (I don't care about 0-100km/h speed, ie. the zoe is quite fast enough, and the Zoe's range is suitable for my uses). I guess the build quality is also better with the Zoe, and it doesn't have a ridiculous giant touch screen in the center console.
Could someone explain the math here. So amazon is worth almost 500 times their income!? That doesn't make any sense even if they are growing like crazy and investing their profits or something.
They traditionally operate on low net incomes so they can kill other products with low or negative margins, and own entire categories, instead of wasting funds paying taxes and shareholders.
How would you chart your body temperature? Starting with 0 kelvin? Then you could conclude that all is well because you can't spot a 2 degree increase, right?
Yes, nice example, let's all just eat mongo-nuts (which btw I have never seen lying on the ground where I live...)
"One Bushman, when asked why he hadn't emulated neighboring tribes by adopting agriculture, replied, Why should we, when there are so many mongongo nuts in the world?"
Places where there is easy access to food have never evolved any technological progress and the societies are still messed up, because they never had to understand co-operation and just have tribalism of some sort. Just compare africa (probably the richest country in resources) with eg. europe.
